> Hello, > > On Sat 08 Sep 2018 at 07:31PM +0200, Ruben Undheim wrote: > >> Yes, you are right, when I read it again. What I have been "reading" before >> is. >> >> "Two different packages must not install programs with different >> functionality >> but with the same filenames if they do not declare that they "Conflict:" >> with >> each other." >> >> But it doesn't say that.. >> >> So this means there is no way to provide the upstream executable name without >> violating the policy? :( - even when using "Conflict:" wisely. > > Yes -- the point is to have a single namespace. > > As David mentioned, you should get in touch with the maintainers of the > other package; it's likely you can come to some agreement. > > -- > Sean Whitton
I've been maintaining netgen lately, and I've been watching the conversation but not piping up as I'm still comparatively new as an "only almost nearly" DM [1]. In general I'm open to proposed solutions, so long as it's kept in mind that netgen is a sufficiently generic name that I doubt this will be the last instance of collision for the binary. Probably as a result of the naming problem, nowadays upstream has rebranded the project as NGSolve [2], of which Netgen is just a component. Originally my thought was to update the package to install the binary to, say, /usr/bin/netgen-mesher, and use the alternatives system to provide a "netgen-binary" as /usr/bin/netgen. However, it was previously stated this wouldn't be the correct solution, so I don't know. [1] https://nm.debian.org/process/541 [2] https://ngsolve.org
